Does Intimate Partner Violence Epidemiology Differ Between Homes With and Without Children? A Population-Based Study of Annual Prevalence and Associated Risk Factors

We sought to determine whether intimate partner violence (IPV) risk factors differed depending upon the presence of children in the home, and to estimate the annual prevalence of IPV first in the general population and then in homes with and without children. We analyzed data from a cross-sectional random sample of 6,836 women in southeastern Pennsylvania interviewed by telephone in 2004. The magnitude of association between IPV and risk factors varied between homes with and without children for women’s alcohol problems (with children, odds ratio (OR) 7.7; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9, 20.9; without children, OR 2.4; 95% CI 0.9, 6.0), and mental health problems (with children, OR 4.0; 95% CI 1.8, 8.9; without children, OR 3.0; 95% CI 1.6, 5.7). Poverty was significantly associated with IPV only in homes without children (OR 3.6; 95% CI 1.9, 7.2). Annual IPV prevalence was 1.2% overall, 1.4% in homes with children, and 1.1% in homes without children. One in 63 children lived in a home with IPV. Differences in IPV risk factors in homes with and without children suggest distinct underlying IPV mechanisms or consequences in these contexts.     

Settling for Less? Organizational Determinants of Discrimination‐Charge Outcomes

Although more than 60,000 workers formally charge their employers with unlawful sex or race employment discrimination annually, fewer than one in five charges results in outcomes favorable to the complainant. Building on sociolegal and organizational theory, this study examines how employing organizations avoid unfavorable discrimination-charge outcomes. Using EEO-1 establishment reports matched to discrimination charge data provided by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, I assess the effect of employers' legal experience, resources, and indicators of legal compliance on the likelihood that complainants receive favorable charge outcomes, benefits, monetary settlements, and policy change mandates. In general, I find that legal experience, establishment size, and indicators of legal compliance insulate employers from unfavorable charge outcomes. However, in situations where employers are willing to settle claims, legally experienced establishments are more likely to pay monetary damages and receive mandates to change their workplace policies.